Within an emotionally challenging situation many people already make that calculation. The result of that one, however, would actually change depending on the probability of future improvement.
Suicides do not happen because life is just unbearable (for most victims of suicidal thoughts this state prolongs for several months up to several years), but because after some time they are sure life will stay this unbearable.
Another thing is, death often seems less bad than it actually is.
Ask yourself: 50 years at Guantanamo Bay—given that you do not suffer severe depression—would you prefer death, if you would know that you could life another 20 years in liberty afterwards?
Then: Remember that in real life you most certainly do not know that integrated over the next 20 years there is really no chance that you could go free. Today—political prisoner in China—in 20 years?
The question of “worse than death” is usually dissolved by asking in what mode of operation the answer is given—the “unbearable, unsolvable” mode, or the “unbearable” mode. Given the human failures, “unsolvable” is usually a mistake, especially when you can expect more than two decades of lifetime. The idealized questions of “how many years torture vs. death” are meaningless for a personal decision if you cannot predict the future with sufficient accuracy.
Of course, human psyche is weak—everybody breaks—at some point. That does not mean that the actualized preference is the correct one given the situation.
“If he thought like me, he’d have known that living in misery sucks marginally less than dying in it.”
I cannot even imagine suffering 50 years at Guantanamo Bay. Is 20 potential years of freedom after 50 years in Guantanamo Bay worth enduring? Probably not, at least to me. Is there a point at which 50 years in Guantanamo Bay becomes worthwhile? Probably. I don’t know exactly where that point is, but I know that it exists (e.g., 1000 yrs of satisfying life is worth it, but is 100?).
Given the human failures, “unsolvable” is usually a mistake, especially when you can expect more than two decades of lifetime.
I agree completely. This is even more obvious when you postulate life-extending technology. However, this still does not change the fact that death is not the absolute worst thing, which was my point (however well I communicated that).
Within an emotionally challenging situation many people already make that calculation. The result of that one, however, would actually change depending on the probability of future improvement.
Suicides do not happen because life is just unbearable (for most victims of suicidal thoughts this state prolongs for several months up to several years), but because after some time they are sure life will stay this unbearable.
Another thing is, death often seems less bad than it actually is.
Ask yourself: 50 years at Guantanamo Bay—given that you do not suffer severe depression—would you prefer death, if you would know that you could life another 20 years in liberty afterwards?
Then: Remember that in real life you most certainly do not know that integrated over the next 20 years there is really no chance that you could go free. Today—political prisoner in China—in 20 years?
The question of “worse than death” is usually dissolved by asking in what mode of operation the answer is given—the “unbearable, unsolvable” mode, or the “unbearable” mode. Given the human failures, “unsolvable” is usually a mistake, especially when you can expect more than two decades of lifetime. The idealized questions of “how many years torture vs. death” are meaningless for a personal decision if you cannot predict the future with sufficient accuracy.
Of course, human psyche is weak—everybody breaks—at some point. That does not mean that the actualized preference is the correct one given the situation.
-- Dr. House (fictional)
I cannot even imagine suffering 50 years at Guantanamo Bay. Is 20 potential years of freedom after 50 years in Guantanamo Bay worth enduring? Probably not, at least to me. Is there a point at which 50 years in Guantanamo Bay becomes worthwhile? Probably. I don’t know exactly where that point is, but I know that it exists (e.g., 1000 yrs of satisfying life is worth it, but is 100?).
I agree completely. This is even more obvious when you postulate life-extending technology. However, this still does not change the fact that death is not the absolute worst thing, which was my point (however well I communicated that).